FYI... (psa)... *Sandisk 400GB private portable storage card for $40*

I bought my Sandisk 400GB private portable storage card (with adaptor) for
$50 at Costco in November, but TheVerge says that Amazon has them for $40.

$50 Costco:
<https://www.costco.com/sandisk-extreme-400gb-microsd-card-with-adapter.product.100797127.html>
SanDisk Extreme 400GB microSD Card with Adapter
Costco Item 4005050, Model SDSQXA1-400G-ACDMA
$40 TheVerge:
<https://www.theverge.com/good-deals/2022/2/5/22918378/sandisk-400gb-microsd-card-nintendo-switch-xbox-series-s-sonos-beam-samsung-galaxy-deal-sale>

For those of you with the choice of portable private storage for any of your
devices, this is, I think, a good deal at about ten bucks per gigabyte.
<https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-400GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08GYG5SVQ/>
SanDisk 400GB Ultra microSDXC UHS-I Memory Card with Adapter - 120MB/s,
C10, U1, Full HD, A1, Micro SD Card - SDSQUA4-400G-GN6MA

Other sizes available are:
1TB === $135
512GB === $61
256GB === $27
200GB === $28
128GB === $20
64GB === $12
2x32GB === $15
32GB = $9

Note that for mobile devices, the card doesn't only augment primary storage.
The key advantage of the card for all devices is that it is three things:
1. Portable
2. Private
3. Storage

Note this fact is very important since a lot of people don't realize
(strange as that may seem, that it's both _portable_ and that it's also
_private_ storage.

As an example, the cloud is huge, but it's not private.
As an another example, primary memory is private, but it's not portable.
--
This is posted because I love when people leverage information so that all
of us get good deals on electronics, which just gets better, faster, and
cheaper every day!

On 2/5/22 13:42, this is what Andy Burnelli wrote:
> FYI... (psa)... *Sandisk 400GB private portable storage card for $40*
>
> I bought my Sandisk 400GB private portable storage card (with adaptor) for
> $50 at Costco in November, but TheVerge says that Amazon has them for $40.
>
> $50 Costco:
> <https://www.costco.com/sandisk-extreme-400gb-microsd-card-with-adapter.product.100797127.html>
> SanDisk Extreme 400GB microSD Card with Adapter
> Costco Item 4005050, Model SDSQXA1-400G-ACDMA
> $40 TheVerge:
> <https://www.theverge.com/good-deals/2022/2/5/22918378/sandisk-400gb-microsd-card-nintendo-switch-xbox-series-s-sonos-beam-samsung-galaxy-deal-sale>
>
> For those of you with the choice of portable private storage for any of your
> devices, this is, I think, a good deal at about ten bucks per gigabyte.
> <https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-400GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08GYG5SVQ/>
> SanDisk 400GB Ultra microSDXC UHS-I Memory Card with Adapter - 120MB/s,
> C10, U1, Full HD, A1, Micro SD Card - SDSQUA4-400G-GN6MA
>
> Other sizes available are:
> 1TB === $135
> 512GB === $61
> 256GB === $27
> 200GB === $28
> 128GB === $20
> 64GB === $12
> 2x32GB === $15
> 32GB = $9
>
> Note that for mobile devices, the card doesn't only augment primary storage.
> The key advantage of the card for all devices is that it is three things:
> 1. Portable
> 2. Private
> 3. Storage
>
> Note this fact is very important since a lot of people don't realize
> (strange as that may seem, that it's both _portable_ and that it's also
> _private_ storage.
>
> As an example, the cloud is huge, but it's not private.
> As an another example, primary memory is private, but it's not portable.
Whoa! I put 64G in mine and have tons of space still, but 400G, the way I use a phone I would never ever fill that up. That or I'll
never find the things I want.

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

On 2/5/2022 11:42 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> FYI... (psa)... *Sandisk 400GB private portable storage card for $40*
>
> I bought my Sandisk 400GB private portable storage card (with adaptor) for
> $50 at Costco in November, but TheVerge says that Amazon has them for $40.
>
> $50 Costco:
> <https://www.costco.com/sandisk-extreme-400gb-microsd-card-with-adapter.product.100797127.html>
> SanDisk Extreme 400GB microSD Card with Adapter
> Costco Item 4005050, Model SDSQXA1-400G-ACDMA
> $40 TheVerge:
> <https://www.theverge.com/good-deals/2022/2/5/22918378/sandisk-400gb-microsd-card-nintendo-switch-xbox-series-s-sonos-beam-samsung-galaxy-deal-sale>
>
> For those of you with the choice of portable private storage for any of your
> devices, this is, I think, a good deal at about ten bucks per gigabyte.

Not that good is it? Oh, do you mean about ten gigabytes per buck?

> <https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-400GB-microSDXC-Memory-Adapter/dp/B08GYG5SVQ/>
> SanDisk 400GB Ultra microSDXC UHS-I Memory Card with Adapter - 120MB/s,
> C10, U1, Full HD, A1, Micro SD Card - SDSQUA4-400G-GN6MA
>
> Other sizes available are:
> 1TB === $135
> 512GB === $61
> 256GB === $27
> 200GB === $28
> 128GB === $20
> 64GB === $12
> 2x32GB === $15
> 32GB = $9
>
> Note that for mobile devices, the card doesn't only augment primary storage.
> The key advantage of the card for all devices is that it is three things:
> 1. Portable
> 2. Private
> 3. Storage
>
> Note this fact is very important since a lot of people don't realize
> (strange as that may seem, that it's both _portable_ and that it's also
> _private_ storage.
>
> As an example, the cloud is huge, but it's not private.
> As an another example, primary memory is private, but it's not portable.
--
Jeff Barnett

On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 14:01:58 -0500, Big Al wrote:

> Whoa! I put 64G in mine and have tons of space still

Sdcards are not about augmenting primary storage so much as they are about
having two _choices_ that the storage cards instantly provide to you, of...
a. Portability, with
b. Privacy

USB sticks and USB drives give you a similar choice, albeit with a slight
hit on portability due to their size and inability to always be connected,
but out of sight (and always in the same filespec, which is important).

For those who need a USB stick with the same filespec every day, I have a
solution for that if folks are interested (in another helpful tutorial).

> but 400G, the way I use a phone I would never ever fill that up.

The choice of portable primary storage has _nothing_ to do with the separate
choice of primary storage sizes.

Nothing.
That's a key point that a _lot_ of people can't seem to comprehend!

They're _different_ things.
a. There is no substitute for portable private storage (that I know of).
b. There are _plenty_ of substitutes to augment primary storage.

You either have that choice.
Or you don't.

As you have noted, for mobile devices, I think most of us would agree that a
_minimum_ primary storage would be 64GB nowadays (e.g., my handful of free
Samsung A32-5G phones each have 64GB while my iPhone has 128GB of storage).
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> lots of Android & iPhone

The point is that even the _free_ phones are 64GB minimum nowadays.
While a _cheap_ laptop, at times, can come with only 32GB (e.g., the HP
stream that I got for free has a 400GB portable private sdcard but only 32GB
of permanent non-portable primary private storage!).

While that's a free PC, for those of who _pay_ for their devices, I think
most of us might tend to agree around that about from 250GB (SSD) to 500GB
(platter) is a common minimum primary storage size (the SSD's being more
expensive than the platters, hence dictating price:performance decisions).

The important point that a lot of people don't get though, is that the
_choice_ of *portable* & *private* storage is a completely _different_
calculus than "how much primary storage do I want" calculations.

It's about choice.
a. It's about privacy
b. It's about portability

You don't get that choice with primary storage no matter how large it is.
Hence the choice of sdcard has _nothing_ to do with your choice of primary
storage sizes.

Even if you had a few terabytes of primary storage, you'd still benefit from
the _choice_ of popping in even 1MB of *portable private* storage (otherwise
none of us would have those USB sticks lying around all over the house).

> That or I'll never find the things I want.

Whether or not you can _find_ things is more a factor of organization than
it is of how much empty portable private storage space you have available.

On my sdcards I keep the _same_ organization as on my primary storage:
/sdcard0/0000/{my stuff}
/sdcard1/0001/{my stuff}

Same on my PC's:
C:\data\{my stuff}
D:\data\{my stuff}

Given Android, WIndows, and Linux all pollute your file system, the "trick"
(IMHO), is to maintain your own menus, app installation location, and files
in hierarchies of your choosing (which almost never change over decades).

For example, on Windows I have:C:\{menus,archives,programs}\
{archivers,browsers,cleaners,editors,finance,games,etc.}

I _never_ have trouble finding things, just like I never have trouble in the
kitchen finding the forks, knives, spoons, etc., because they're organized.

My menu hierarchy is organized the way I use things, just as my archive is
organized and just as the installation hierarchy is organized the same way.

My phone is so well organized that it's intantly ported from my phone to
_any_ other phone, with all the homescreen folders in the _exact_ same
place, all using the portable private storage and _not_ the cloud!

My PC's are so well organized that my Windows XP menu folders copy exactly
(yes, exactly) over from WInXP to Windows 10 and they work out of the box!

Yes. You heard that right. Menus are just folders & shortcuts. The WinXP
menu, if well organized, can be copied, verbatim (yes, verbatim!) to Win10
and when pinned to the taskbar, the shortcuts work exactly on Win10 as they
did on WinXP.

I've disabled Cortana _long_ ago, and you won't ever see the "search" icon
wasting space on my taskbar, for example, since I never need to search.

Before I install anything, I already know where it belongs. FOr example,
yesterday I installed a half dozen apps for generating barcodes to place in
portable private encrypted file containers on portable private storage.

Each app _already_ had a place (defined a decade or more ago... since what
we do with a computing device hasn't changed in decades save for minor
tweaks).

For example, yesterday I added portable barcode privacy encrypted file
containers to my Android device, and the new tools fit into the old menus:
<https://i.postimg.cc/7LmRqXNn/organize01.jpg>

Likewise with the new tools fitting on my PC old menus perfectly easily:
<https://i.postimg.cc/bN7bp2Bf/organize02.jpg>

Why is it so easy?
Because my computers are organized years ahead of time.

It's simple but for most people, organization isn't easy on a computer.
Yet I argue they organize their kitchen drawers, so why not their computers?

Unlike you, apparently, I never have to _search_ for anything!

Cortana is disabled on Windows because I don't need it (and because I
disable _everything_ from Microsoft that can suck out your privacy).

Likewise with Google on my phone - everything is disabled by default.
<https://i.postimg.cc/qqVFqVwD/updateallapps10.jpg>

There is no Microsoft account on my computer and none on my phone.

On my phone, _because_ I have the choice of portable private storage, all
the apps come over because the FOSS Google Play client _saves_ all the
downloaded APKs automatically (that's what an app store "should" do!)
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zBjX5kJ/aurora09.jpg> Save all APKs you've installed

So to populate a hundred phones would be as simple. It's plug and play
essentially all without putting a single bit of your data on another
computer or on the net.
<https://i.postimg.cc/CL9GpzVc/aurora01.jpg> FOSS Google Play Store client
<https://i.postimg.cc/Lspjhw5f/aurora02.jpg> Filters Google won't allow
<https://i.postimg.cc/PrvDyT8Y/aurora03.jpg> *Automatic & extended updates*
<https://i.postimg.cc/Z5kdD2rg/aurora04.jpg> Choose where to download APKs
<https://i.postimg.cc/RF06HBB3/aurora05.jpg> Filters Google won't give you
<https://i.postimg.cc/FRnfbBrT/aurora06.jpg> Google Play Store still works
<https://i.postimg.cc/0jMzV0rP/aurora07.jpg> Keep logs of when last updated
<https://i.postimg.cc/7PdGfdQ6/aurora08.jpg> Search filters are persistent
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zBjX5kJ/aurora09.jpg> Save all APKs you've installed
<https://i.postimg.cc/NG5pHyBx/aurora10.jpg> No need for a Google Account
<https://i.postimg.cc/28WG0Pqb/aurora11.jpg> Works alongside Google Play
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0Qz7fZy/aurora12.jpg> Saves all APKs after install
<https://i.postimg.cc/pLhBm3vX/aurora13.jpg> All sorts of excellent filters
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1BwgSpm/aurora14.jpg> Search by ratings or downloads
<https://i.postimg.cc/G2QP0CFz/aurora15.jpg> Its a well-supported FOSS app

That.

That is an advantage of portable private storage which sdcards provide.
(Most people, apparently, are completely unaware of these choices!)
--
I'm extremely knowledgeable at organizing computer systems and I have a
helpful heart so I may give you more information than you can process.
If you have a question, I will try to fully apprise you of suitable
solutions since I almost never fail at solving organizational problems.

On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 12:46:09 -0700, Jeff Barnett wrote:

>> devices, this is, I think, a good deal at about ten bucks per gigabyte.
>
> Not that good is it? Oh, do you mean about ten gigabytes per buck?

Oooops. My mistake. Mea culpa.
THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT!

I am _never_ afraid to admit a mistake (only fools do that).

THANK you for correcting my mistake.
I apologize for the inadvertent math error.
--
A lot of people don't seem to comprehend the inherent value of portable
private storage which we get with sdcards as they "think" sdcards are only
to augment primary storage (which isn't portable, even as it's private).

On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:19:34 -0000 (UTC), Andy Burnelli wrote:

> I apologize for the inadvertent math error.

One question others can help me with answering though, on the math, is _why_
it cost (in general) far more for, oh, say, 1GB of primary storage, when the
sdcard (which isn't as fast, of course) costs only a fraction of that?

Why does primary storage cost more, per GB, than portable private storage?

On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 at 20:19:34, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
>On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 12:46:09 -0700, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>
>>> devices, this is, I think, a good deal at about ten bucks per gigabyte.
>>
>> Not that good is it? Oh, do you mean about ten gigabytes per buck?
>
>Oooops. My mistake. Mea culpa.
>THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT!
>
>I am _never_ afraid to admit a mistake (only fools do that).

Only fools _are_ that, I think you mean (-:
>
>THANK you for correcting my mistake.
>I apologize for the inadvertent math error.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... "from a person I admire, respect, and deeply love." "Who was that then?"
"Me." (Zaphod Beeblebrox in the Link episode.)

On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 at 20:29:39, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
>On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:19:34 -0000 (UTC), Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
>> I apologize for the inadvertent math error.
>
>One question others can help me with answering though, on the math, is _why_
>it cost (in general) far more for, oh, say, 1GB of primary storage, when the
>sdcard (which isn't as fast, of course) costs only a fraction of that?
>
>Why does primary storage cost more, per GB, than portable private storage?

If you mean internal RAM vs. USB sticks or SD cards: the speed, as you
say, is one factor (by some orders of magnitude, I think) - and RAM does
not have a low limit on number of writes. (When memory sticks first came
out, some people used them to augment the memory in their PCs - only to
find that typical Windows memory usage would kill them, sometimes in a
matter of hours.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"EARTH is 98% full. Please delete anybody you can." - Fortunes file

On 2/5/2022 11:01 AM, Big Al wrote:

<snip>

> Whoa!  I put 64G in mine and have tons of space still, but 400G, the way
> I use a phone I would never ever fill that up.    That or I'll never
> find the things I want.

Note that the 400GB card from Amazon for $39.99
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08GYG5SVQ> is a lower speed card (120MB/s)
than the 400GB card from Costco for $49.99 (160MB/s)
<https://www.costco.com/sandisk-extreme-400gb-microsd-card-with-adapter.product.100797127.html>.

The difference is probably no big deal to most people but could make a
difference in some applications.

On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 00:46:23 +0000, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> If you mean internal RAM vs. USB sticks or SD cards: the speed, as you
> say, is one factor (by some orders of magnitude, I think) - and RAM does
> not have a low limit on number of writes. (When memory sticks first came
> out, some people used them to augment the memory in their PCs - only to
> find that typical Windows memory usage would kill them, sometimes in a
> matter of hours.)

Hi J.P. Gilliver,

First, allow me to openly commend you for responding as a _adult_ would.
You aren't paid to answer my questions, so I appreciate that you did so.
And you did so, this time, as an adult would. Kudos to you.

'Nuff said on that as Usenet is water under the bridge.

To respond to your request for clarification on my question, I was NOT
comparing RAM (which can take up room on valuable SOC real estate).

The 1GB is probably what threw you off, and in hindsight I should have used
32GB or 64GB which would make it more clear I was talking about main
storage.

Since I retired, I haven't looked at computer architecture, but what I'm
comparing is the primary storage quoted when purchasing a PC.
a. For PC's, it's the size of the C drive
b. For phones, it's the size of the built-in user storage

As you well know the operating system is also loaded into that primary
storage where in the case of the HP Stream and all phones, it's permanent.

If you want to buy a phone or PC that has 32GB vs 64GB, often the price
differential is _hugely_ different than it would be for a 32GB to 64GB delta
for sdcards.

Why is that delta often astoundingly huge between...
a. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in primary storage (for the OS & data), vs
b. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in portable private secondary storage?

TIA

On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 18:26:06 -0800, sms wrote:

> The difference is probably no big deal to most people but could make a
> difference in some applications.

I openly thank Steve for pointing that speed discrepancy out, where I don't
have to admit it, but I had _not_ even noticed that which Steve pointed out!

In a PSA thread, I apologize for leading people astray, because had I
noticed that important distinction, I would have _wanted_ people to know.

Personally, when choices get down to ten dollars for things you keep for the
rest of your life (in some value thereof), I would probably have opted for
the faster card (had I not already gotten a few of them last November).

I apologize to everyone that Steve had to post that clarification, which I
admit is my fault for not having pointed it out in the original posting.

Mea culpa.
--
Ignorance can be cured; it's stubborn stupidity that is impossible to cure.

On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 at 05:26:24, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
>On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 00:46:23 +0000, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>
>> If you mean internal RAM vs. USB sticks or SD cards: the speed, as you
>> say, is one factor (by some orders of magnitude, I think) - and RAM does
>> not have a low limit on number of writes. (When memory sticks first came
>> out, some people used them to augment the memory in their PCs - only to
>> find that typical Windows memory usage would kill them, sometimes in a
>> matter of hours.)
>
>Hi J.P. Gilliver,
>
>First, allow me to openly commend you for responding as a _adult_ would.
>You aren't paid to answer my questions, so I appreciate that you did so.
>And you did so, this time, as an adult would. Kudos to you.

This "Burnelli" incarnation seems, so far, to be a bit more adult than
the "Arlen" ones, so I'm giving it the benefit if the doubt. Though
continually changing the name/whatever is still suspicion-generating.)
>
>'Nuff said on that as Usenet is water under the bridge.

Fine by me (-: [Just avoid "tutorial" (-:]
>
>To respond to your request for clarification on my question, I was NOT
>comparing RAM (which can take up room on valuable SOC real estate).
>
>The 1GB is probably what threw you off, and in hindsight I should have used
>32GB or 64GB which would make it more clear I was talking about main
>storage.
>
>Since I retired, I haven't looked at computer architecture, but what I'm
>comparing is the primary storage quoted when purchasing a PC.
>a. For PC's, it's the size of the C drive

These days, when looking at PCs, I - and I think most people - look at
_both_ the amount of RAM and the size of C: (often SSD these days).

>b. For phones, it's the size of the built-in user storage

I haven't bought a 'phone since Android 4.2 (-:
>
>As you well know the operating system is also loaded into that primary
>storage where in the case of the HP Stream and all phones, it's permanent.

Yes, I continue to be surprised that Windows PCs that have so little
"disc" space (usually SSD soldered to the board) less than twice the
space needed by the OS, continua to sell at all. I suppose they're of
use to people who (a) have a permanent online connection and (b) store
_everything_ "in the cloud", but it certainly isn't me.
>
>If you want to buy a phone or PC that has 32GB vs 64GB, often the price
>differential is _hugely_ different than it would be for a 32GB to 64GB delta
>for sdcards.
>
>Why is that delta often astoundingly huge between...
>a. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in primary storage (for the OS & data), vs
>b. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in portable private secondary storage?

Paul can probably explain: I think it's that there is some threshold, in
the technology, between single or dual level memory cells, and triple or
quadruple. I _presume_ any such threshold is continually rising, but
maybe it has slowed down of late.
>
>TIA
YW. Above is mostly conjecture - I too haven't paid a _lot_ of attention
to PC architecture/sizes of late; since this W7-32 machine with 3G RAM
does most of what I need, I've not looked too hard (though I have upped
its HDD - still spinning - to 2G).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

half the lies they tell about me aren't true. - Yogi Berra

On 2/6/2022 9:59 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 at 05:26:24, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 00:46:23 +0000, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>
>>> If you mean internal RAM vs. USB sticks or SD cards: the speed, as you
>>> say, is one factor (by some orders of magnitude, I think) - and RAM does
>>> not have a low limit on number of writes. (When memory sticks first came
>>> out, some people used them to augment the memory in their PCs - only to
>>> find that typical Windows memory usage would kill them, sometimes in a
>>> matter of hours.)
>>
>> Hi J.P. Gilliver,
>>
>> First, allow me to openly commend you for responding as a _adult_ would.
>> You aren't paid to answer my questions, so I appreciate that you did so.
>> And you did so, this time, as an adult would. Kudos to you.
>
> This "Burnelli" incarnation seems, so far, to be a bit more adult than the "Arlen" ones, so I'm giving it the benefit if the doubt. Though continually changing the name/whatever is still suspicion-generating.)
>>
>> 'Nuff said on that as Usenet is water under the bridge.
>
> Fine by me (-: [Just avoid "tutorial" (-:]
>>
>> To respond to your request for clarification on my question, I was NOT
>> comparing RAM (which can take up room on valuable SOC real estate).
>>
>> The 1GB is probably what threw you off, and in hindsight I should have used
>> 32GB or 64GB which would make it more clear I was talking about main
>> storage.
>>
>> Since I retired, I haven't looked at computer architecture, but what I'm
>> comparing is the primary storage quoted when purchasing a PC.
>> a. For PC's, it's the size of the C drive
>
> These days, when looking at PCs, I - and I think most people - look at _both_ the amount of RAM and the size of C: (often SSD these days).
>
>> b. For phones, it's the size of the built-in user storage
>
> I haven't bought a 'phone since Android 4.2 (-:
>>
>> As you well know the operating system is also loaded into that primary
>> storage where in the case of the HP Stream and all phones, it's permanent.
>
> Yes, I continue to be surprised that Windows PCs that have so little "disc" space (usually SSD soldered to the board) less than twice the space needed by the OS, continua to sell at all. I suppose they're of use to people who (a) have a permanent online connection and (b) store _everything_ "in the cloud", but it certainly isn't me.
>>
>> If you want to buy a phone or PC that has 32GB vs 64GB, often the price
>> differential is _hugely_ different than it would be for a 32GB to 64GB delta
>> for sdcards.
>>
>> Why is that delta often astoundingly huge between...
>> a. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in primary storage (for the OS & data), vs
>> b. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in portable private secondary storage?
>
> Paul can probably explain: I think it's that there is some threshold, in the technology, between single or dual level memory cells, and triple or quadruple. I _presume_ any such threshold is continually rising, but maybe it has slowed down of late.
>>
>> TIA
> YW. Above is mostly conjecture - I too haven't paid a _lot_ of attention to PC architecture/sizes of late; since this W7-32 machine with 3G RAM does most of what I need, I've not looked too hard (though I have upped its HDD - still spinning - to 2G).

eMMC storage comes mainly in power-of-two increments.

There would be single chip versions of 32GB, 64GB, 128GB.

As for the imaginative read rates (160MB/sec on a UHS-I interface
that officially runs at 104MB/sec), think about what is
going to happen when that SD has sat on the shelf for
3 months, and the flash content has become "soggy". You're
suddenly going to discover it no longer runs at 160MB/sec
while every sector read off the thing needs error correction.

I don't expect QLC that someone has placed inside an SD,
to behave any better.

Paul

On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 14:59:22 +0000, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> This "Burnelli" incarnation seems, so far, to be a bit more adult than
> the "Arlen" ones, so I'm giving it the benefit if the doubt. Though
> continually changing the name/whatever is still suspicion-generating.)

John,
I'm the same purposefully helpful caring & giving person I always was.
a. I don't use Usenet for amusement
b. I use Usenet to obtain and dispense value

All my tutorials, for example, are using free software that EVERYONE
can instantly use (and all my tutorials are tested, personally, by me).

What the iKooks _hate_ is I post a lot of facts about Apple they hate.
What you appear to hate is that I extol the virtues of privacy.

If I was hiding, would I post a TUTORIAL with these kind of screenshots?
<https://i.postimg.cc/7LmRqXNn/organize01.jpg> Android organization
<https://i.postimg.cc/bN7bp2Bf/organize02.jpg> Windows organization

Would I?
Ask yourself that question, John.

Would I?

a. The headers are meaningless save for a single line, the SUBJECT.
b. The rest is tracking information (that robots can save forever).
c. I don't hide in the BODY (I'm hiding not from you, but from them).

The WPOS who gleefully claim that they "found" me are not adding any value.
What I strive to do, John, is add value in every post.

The only post that don't add value is that I confront the WPOS bullies.
Most of the time it's people who have _never_ added any value to Usenet.

For example, what's the answer to this question from anyone here?
How many tutorials have you written and posted to Usenet?
How many people have you _helped_ by providing detailed useful replies?

What you see is the iKooks _hate_ me as do the WPOS (who are the trolls).
a. The iKooks hate facts about Apple (which I often provide to them).
b. The WPOS attack me as they call me a troll (due to header privacy).
c. And yet, they can't find even a _single_ thread that is a troll.
Not even one.
In two decades of posting to Usenet.
Not a single troll.

HINT: You have to troll, to be a troll, just like you have to rob banks
to be called a bank robber (not just because you wear a mask).

What you see from me that you don't think is adult is my response to trolls.
And my response to the iKooks who, for example, viciously derailed this:
*How to copy files both ways anywhere you want to/from iPhone/iPad over USB*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/qmkDxzo4bN0>

You have to ask yourself why the iKooks viciously derailed that thread.
Do you even know why?
I do.

They won of course.
The infestation always wins.

The instant the WPOS or iKooks infest any thread, it's ruined.
They will destroy the value of any thread whose topic they don't like.

And yet, who on earth could _hate_ a useful topic like this but they?
*How to copy anything you want to and from anywhere you want*

Note: There are unintuitive tricks in there that took me years to learn.

>>'Nuff said on that as Usenet is water under the bridge.
>
> Fine by me (-: [Just avoid "tutorial" (-:]

In that joke, you hit upon something very interesting that just happened.
a. You were joking that my tutorials are easy to spot (and they are!)
b. But remember - I use the same style and screenshots in the body.
c. So I'm only hiding from header robots (which clearly abound).

Funny story that just happened here, on this very newsgroup, a week ago.
a. VanguardLH called me an "asshole" for wanting privacy
b. Then he and Frank spend days trying to make sense of the header
c. And yet, the header is virtually meaningless (save for the SUBJECT)

Which brings me back to your "tutorial" joke, John.
A. The fact VanguardLH spent all that time on parsing a meaningless header
B. And yet, all he really needed was a filter that looked at the SUBJECT
C. Or the body

Shows _why_ people like VanguardLH don't make rational decisions.

Note: I called VanguardLH out on why he thinks people wanting privacy are
assholes, and, true to form, he ignored the request to respond as an adult.

Yet...Usenet is water under the bridge...

I doubt VanguardLH has even one tenth the higher education I have, nor the
intelligence (mine is at least average, for example), but if he responded
right now as an adult would, then I'd _treat_ him as an adult.

Usenet is water under the bridge.
Everyone, even the iKooks, can redeem themselves.

All they need to do is act like an adult.

> These days, when looking at PCs, I - and I think most people - look at
> _both_ the amount of RAM and the size of C: (often SSD these days).

This is a good conversation to have because it's _philosophical_ and
therefore it requires intelligent thought processes to comprehend.

The topic of this thread, clearly, is "inexpensive large sdcards", right?
That's the topic, right?

OK. Now, _why_ would anyone _need_ a large sdcard anyway, John?
HINT: Be careful. I posit most people omit one of its biggest strengths!
And that.
That.
That.

That is my point.
But beware.

The use model is _different_ for mobile devices than for desktops, John.

For a PC, what is the biggest strength of a large sdcard, John?
For a mobile device, what is the biggest strength of a large sdcard, John?

HINT: Most people can answer this with the obvious answer, but extremely few
seem to comprehend the vastly greater value which isn't obvious to them.

>>b. For phones, it's the size of the built-in user storage
>
> I haven't bought a 'phone since Android 4.2 (-:

Good for you. My Android 4.2 (or was it 4.4) was a Samsung Galaxy S3 which I
loved because the batteries were not only replaceable, but there was a value
in the portability too (sound familiar?).

I had a 7Amp Hour (yes, you heard that right), seven amp hour battery in my
Samsung Galaxy S3, two in fact, where I'd keep one battery in the wall
charger (yes, the battery goes in the wall charger) and one in the phone.

That is a fantastic value of replaceable batteries, where we discussed this
topic recently on the Android newsgroup because I _love_ those old phones!
*I love phones with user swappable batteries*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/tlGXE3kwiu8>

BTW, notice in that thread (like in all my threads), I don't hide from _you_
in that it's always the same photos, the same screenshots, the same
attention to detail, etc.

That's why every time I see someone say after a few thousand of my posts
"Hey, I found you!"
I have to shake my head in dismay that people are literally _that_ stupid.
The problem I have with them is they don't ever add any value but they love
to disparage mine, where I suspect they are using Usenet for amusement.

BTW, I've posted many tutorials for Android phones - you'll love them!
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
Many are about privacy but most are about the best free functionality.

> Yes, I continue to be surprised that Windows PCs that have so little
> "disc" space (usually SSD soldered to the board) less than twice the
> space needed by the OS, continua to sell at all. I suppose they're of
> use to people who (a) have a permanent online connection and (b) store
> _everything_ "in the cloud", but it certainly isn't me.

I got a bunch of HP streams for free and what I learned is the same thing I
learned when I went from the Samsung Galaxy S3 to a Google Moto G phone
which is you _really_ learn the limits of a design when you use the crappy
product.

I've posted tutorials on how to change tires (i.e., remove the rubber from
the wheel and put them back on and balance them at home) where you learn the
most from the crappy tools about how tires are built. Try it some day!

Same with phones. And the same with computers.

When you have a phone that has no sdcard, you learn how crippled it is.
When you have a PC that is stuck with 32GB of C: drive, you learn how
crippled it is.

When you have a 1TB C drive, you don't even realize how much space Windows
takes up (nor do you care).

In the HP Streams, the large sdcard is de rigueur, but even then the laptops
are crippled so I wouldn't get them unless they were for free (and that's
OK).

There is an IMPORTANT POINT to make though, about the PURPOSE of sdcards.
a. In a crappy device, the sdcard mainly augments the primary storage
b. But in a decent device, the sdcard takes on a vastly different role

>>Why is that delta often astoundingly huge between...
>>a. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in primary storage (for the OS & data), vs
>>b. The jump of 32GB to 64GB in portable private secondary storage?
>
> Paul can probably explain: I think it's that there is some threshold, in
> the technology, between single or dual level memory cells, and triple or
> quadruple. I _presume_ any such threshold is continually rising, but
> maybe it has slowed down of late.

Yes. Paul is excellent. He is like I am in that he's detailed, and he's
purposefully helpful.